Allowed

Rajnish@ Tinku v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2021BAIL/3582/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant in a case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The applicant had been granted bail in connected criminal cases and satisfied other relevant legal criteria.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with witnesses, and no illegal activities.

Rajnish@ Tinku Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3582 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rajnish@ Tinku Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Mishra,Amit Kumar,Umesh Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

'Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.85 of 2018, under Section 2/3 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Noorpur, district Bijnor and is in jail since 07.12.2020, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶9

An first information report dated 28.02.2018 was lodged under Section 2/3 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 alleging that the applicant alongwith others formed a gang and have committed various offences.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been implicated in the present case on the basis of his involvement in two other criminal cases mentioned in gang chart, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.27 of the affidavit accompanying this bail application. He next submitted that the applicant has been granted bail in the criminal cases shown against him in the gang chart. Copy of the one bail order has been annexed on page no.29 of the affidavit accompanying this application, copies of bail orders have been annexed on page nos.8 onwards of the supplementary affidavit, hence the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However he does not dispute the fact that the applicant has been granted bail in the case mentioned against him in the gang chart.

¶12

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶13

Let the applicant Rajnish @ Tinku involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending

¶15

before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶16

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶17

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶18

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶21

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.1.2021

¶23

R./

Rajnish@ Tinku v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnish@ Tinku v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vikrant Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Rajhans@ Dharmi@ Arun Gwalaa@ Deepak Sharma@ Rajan@ Dharmveer Vs State of U.P.

Aadil Vs State of Up

Ankit Gupta Vs State of Up